ArticleEuropean oral research2018
Effect of dentin pretreatment on shear bond strength of three resin-based luting cements.
Article in European oral research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of dentin surface pretreatment with four conditioning agents on micro-shear bond strength of a self-adhesive cement.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2022Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Microtensile Bond Strength in Three Different Dentin Luting Agents: AnJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aims of this study were; to compare the shear bond strength values of resin-based luting cements using etch-and-rinse, self-etching or self-adhesive techniques and to evaluate the effects of pretreatment with 0.2%, and 2% chlorhexidine (CHX) solutions on the bonding stability to dentin. MATERIALS AND
methodsNinety specimens were divided into 9 groups of equal sample size (0.2% CHX, 2% CHX and no CHX application groups). Variolink N (multi-step etch-and-rinse technique), Panavia F2.0 (self-etching technique), or RelyX U200 (self-adhesive technique) resin-based luting cement was applied. All specimens were subjected to shear bond strength test (SBS) after bonding procedure. The mode of failure was analyzed by using a stereomicroscope.
resultsThere were no significant differences among study groups for the dentin treatment factor. However, for luting cement factor, significant differences were found and Variolink N showed the highest SBS values.
conclusionCHX application has no immediate effect on the SBS values of any resin cements. Despite the development of simplified cementation techniques, etch-and-rinse technique is still the most reliable technique because of its high bond strength to dentin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.